Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 03:36:22PM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: Can someone tell me about this automatic merge? I was going to submit a formal patch to change the contents of src/intl but it seems that if we have an automatic merge to copy libiberty from gcc to src, we could do the same for intl (and src/config.rhost) and then I wouldn't need to do any actual checkins for those changes. If we can do that then the only thing I would need to change by hand would be the intl text that is in the MAINTAINERS file. Who maintains this automatic merge process? The man to ask about this is DJ Delorie. I'm not sure how much work it is on his part, though. Either way it would probably be best to do the initial sync by hand. And is it really plausible that nothing in src would need updating for the new intl? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
Who maintains this automatic merge process? Me. I have a cron job that checks out gcc's and src's libiberty and include, compares them, copies any differing files to src, and sends me email. I then run a do it script to do the actual commit. There's not much advantage in using this setup for an initial merge (it would take as much effort to set it up as it would to just do the merge). It's much more useful as an ongoing merge system.
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
DJ Delorie wrote: Who maintains this automatic merge process? Me. I have a cron job that checks out gcc's and src's libiberty and include, compares them, copies any differing files to src, and sends me email. I then run a do it script to do the actual commit. There's not much advantage in using this setup for an initial merge (it would take as much effort to set it up as it would to just do the merge). It's much more useful as an ongoing merge system. Was there not a way to combine the two (gcc and src) via console commands? I recall doing this a long time ago, back when Mumitt was around. He had a web page describing how to build the tool chain for cygwin/mingw/linux. There was another one on sourceware. i have not done this in years. (5). Bobby
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
Was there not a way to combine the two (gcc and src) via console commands? We're not talking about combining source trees for a build, we're talking about making sure both source trees happen to have the same sources in them to start with.
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
Who maintains this automatic merge process? The man to ask about this is DJ Delorie. I'm not sure how much work it is on his part, though. Either way it would probably be best to do the initial sync by hand. And is it really plausible that nothing in src would need updating for the new intl? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery If something in src is going to need updating I don't know what it is. I built binutils, gas, and gdb on HP-UX platforms using the gcc intl directory and had no problems. When I built on Linux the intl directory was basically ignored because it used the system gettext stuff. I'm sure something might need updating after this change and I am willing to try and fix anything I break, but I am not sure what other testing I can do with the platforms I have available. Do you have any suggestions as to what products or platforms might cause problems? I did get one reply from a combined-tree user who said they used the gcc version of intl when building things in a combined-tree. Steve Ellcey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 04:06:29PM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: I'm sure something might need updating after this change and I am willing to try and fix anything I break, but I am not sure what other testing I can do with the platforms I have available. Do you have any suggestions as to what products or platforms might cause problems? No; I'm just surprised that it worked. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
What do people who build in a combined tree do with intl? Do they use the GCC version or the src tree version? Is there any consensus about whether or not there should be a single version of intl, and if so, which one should be used? FWIW, I have always given preference to the gcc version. -- Jim Lemke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Orillia, Ontario
intl directory: gcc vs. src
I sent this email earlier to just binutils and got no replies, so I thought I would try broadening my scope: While looking at updating the src tree to use newer versions of autoconf I have run into the issue of the intl directory. I found some old discussions about the two different versions (one in the src tree, one in the gcc tree) but it doesn't look like any work was done to bring them into alignment. By removing the AM_PROG_INSTALL definition from aclocal.m4 I was able to run autoconf 2.59 on the src tree intl subdir with no problems but I was wondering if we should take the time to synchronize the GCC intl directory with the src tree intl directory. The GCC version is already configured with autoconf 2.59. I did some testing by copying my GCC intl directory (plus config.rpath) into my src tree and I was able to build binutils and gas with no problem and with no other changes needed. This was on a system where libintl was not installed and the intl subdir was built. What do people who build in a combined tree do with intl? Do they use the GCC version or the src tree version? Is there any consensus about whether or not there should be a single version of intl, and if so, which one should be used? Steve Ellcey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src
Steve Ellcey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: By removing the AM_PROG_INSTALL definition from aclocal.m4 I was able to run autoconf 2.59 on the src tree intl subdir with no problems but I was wondering if we should take the time to synchronize the GCC intl directory with the src tree intl directory. The GCC version is already configured with autoconf 2.59. I did some testing by copying my GCC intl directory (plus config.rpath) into my src tree and I was able to build binutils and gas with no problem and with no other changes needed. This was on a system where libintl was not installed and the intl subdir was built. What do people who build in a combined tree do with intl? Do they use the GCC version or the src tree version? Is there any consensus about whether or not there should be a single version of intl, and if so, which one should be used? Yes, there should be a single version of intl. I don't think anybody cares which version is used, as long as it works. If you have taken the time to test a unified intl, and are prepared to fix any problems, I think your patch would be great. Ian
